逝者护理者认为美国安宁疗护的总体质量--对 3389 篇在线护理者评论的自然语言处理和情感分析。

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Jason Hotchkiss, Emily Ridderman, William Buftin
{"title":"逝者护理者认为美国安宁疗护的总体质量--对 3389 篇在线护理者评论的自然语言处理和情感分析。","authors":"Jason Hotchkiss, Emily Ridderman, William Buftin","doi":"10.1177/10499091231185593","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objectives:</b> With an untapped quality resource in online hospice reviews, study aims were exploring hospice caregiver experiences and assessing their expectations of the hospice Medicare benefit. <b>Methods:</b> Topical and sentiment analysis was conducted using natural language processing (NLP) of Google and Yelp caregiver reviews (n = 3393) between 2013-2023 using Google NLP. Stratified sampling weighted by hospice size to approximate the daily census of US hospice enrollees. <b>Results:</b> Overall caregiver sentiment of hospice care was neutral (S = .14). <i>Therapeutic, achievable expectations</i> and <i>misperceptions, unachievable expectations</i> were, respectively, the most and least prevalent domains. Four topics with the highest prevalence, all had moderately positive sentiments: <i>caring staff</i>, <i>staff professionalism and knowledge</i>; <i>emotional, spiritual, bereavement support</i>; and <i>responsive, timely or helpful</i>. Lowest sentiments scores were <i>lack of staffing</i>; <i>promises made, but not kept</i>, <i>pain, symptoms and medications; sped-up death, hasted, or sedated;</i> and <i>money, staff motivations</i>. <b>Significance of Results:</b> Caregivers overall rating of hospice was neutral, largely due to moderate sentiment on achievable expectations in two-thirds of reviews mixed with unachievable expectations in one-sixth of reviews. Hospice caregivers were most likely to recommend hospices with caring staff, providing quality care, responsive to requests, and offering family support. Lack of staff, inadequate pain-symptom management were the two biggest barriers to hospice quality. All eight CAHPS measures were found in the discovered review topics. Close-ended CAHPS scores and open-ended online reviews have complementary insights. Future research should explore associations between CAHPS and review insights.</p>","PeriodicalId":50810,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"527-544"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Overall US Hospice Quality According to Decedent Caregivers-Natural Language Processing and Sentiment Analysis of 3389 Online Caregiver Reviews.\",\"authors\":\"Jason Hotchkiss, Emily Ridderman, William Buftin\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10499091231185593\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Objectives:</b> With an untapped quality resource in online hospice reviews, study aims were exploring hospice caregiver experiences and assessing their expectations of the hospice Medicare benefit. <b>Methods:</b> Topical and sentiment analysis was conducted using natural language processing (NLP) of Google and Yelp caregiver reviews (n = 3393) between 2013-2023 using Google NLP. Stratified sampling weighted by hospice size to approximate the daily census of US hospice enrollees. <b>Results:</b> Overall caregiver sentiment of hospice care was neutral (S = .14). <i>Therapeutic, achievable expectations</i> and <i>misperceptions, unachievable expectations</i> were, respectively, the most and least prevalent domains. Four topics with the highest prevalence, all had moderately positive sentiments: <i>caring staff</i>, <i>staff professionalism and knowledge</i>; <i>emotional, spiritual, bereavement support</i>; and <i>responsive, timely or helpful</i>. Lowest sentiments scores were <i>lack of staffing</i>; <i>promises made, but not kept</i>, <i>pain, symptoms and medications; sped-up death, hasted, or sedated;</i> and <i>money, staff motivations</i>. <b>Significance of Results:</b> Caregivers overall rating of hospice was neutral, largely due to moderate sentiment on achievable expectations in two-thirds of reviews mixed with unachievable expectations in one-sixth of reviews. Hospice caregivers were most likely to recommend hospices with caring staff, providing quality care, responsive to requests, and offering family support. Lack of staff, inadequate pain-symptom management were the two biggest barriers to hospice quality. All eight CAHPS measures were found in the discovered review topics. Close-ended CAHPS scores and open-ended online reviews have complementary insights. Future research should explore associations between CAHPS and review insights.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50810,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"527-544\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10499091231185593\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/6/20 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10499091231185593","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/6/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究目的在线安宁疗护评论是一个尚未开发的优质资源,研究目的是探索安宁疗护护理人员的经验,评估他们对安宁疗护医疗保险福利的期望。研究方法:使用语音识别技术进行主题和情感分析:使用谷歌自然语言处理(NLP)对2013-2023年间谷歌和Yelp护理人员的评论(n = 3393)进行主题和情感分析。根据安宁疗护规模进行分层抽样,以接近美国安宁疗护参保者的每日人口普查。结果:护理人员对安宁疗护的总体评价为中性(S = .14)。治疗性、可实现的期望和误解、不可实现的期望分别是最普遍和最不普遍的领域。四个普遍性最高的主题均具有中等程度的积极情感:员工关怀、员工专业性和知识;情感、精神和丧亲支持;以及响应、及时或帮助。感性得分最低的是人员配备不足;承诺但未兑现;疼痛、症状和药物;加速死亡、匆忙或镇静;以及金钱、员工动机。结果的意义:护理人员对安宁疗护的总体评价为中性,这主要是由于三分之二的评论对可实现的期望持温和态度,而六分之一的评论对不可实现的期望持怀疑态度。安寧療護照護者最可能推薦的安寧療護機構是有關懷的工作人員、提供優質療護、對要求有回應,以及提供家屬支援的安寧療護機構。缺乏工作人员和疼痛症状管理不足是影响安宁疗护质量的两大障碍。在已发现的审查主题中,发现了所有八项 CAHPS 测量。封闭式CAHPS评分和开放式在线评论具有互补性。未来的研究应探索 CAHPS 与评论见解之间的关联。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Overall US Hospice Quality According to Decedent Caregivers-Natural Language Processing and Sentiment Analysis of 3389 Online Caregiver Reviews.

Objectives: With an untapped quality resource in online hospice reviews, study aims were exploring hospice caregiver experiences and assessing their expectations of the hospice Medicare benefit. Methods: Topical and sentiment analysis was conducted using natural language processing (NLP) of Google and Yelp caregiver reviews (n = 3393) between 2013-2023 using Google NLP. Stratified sampling weighted by hospice size to approximate the daily census of US hospice enrollees. Results: Overall caregiver sentiment of hospice care was neutral (S = .14). Therapeutic, achievable expectations and misperceptions, unachievable expectations were, respectively, the most and least prevalent domains. Four topics with the highest prevalence, all had moderately positive sentiments: caring staff, staff professionalism and knowledge; emotional, spiritual, bereavement support; and responsive, timely or helpful. Lowest sentiments scores were lack of staffing; promises made, but not kept, pain, symptoms and medications; sped-up death, hasted, or sedated; and money, staff motivations. Significance of Results: Caregivers overall rating of hospice was neutral, largely due to moderate sentiment on achievable expectations in two-thirds of reviews mixed with unachievable expectations in one-sixth of reviews. Hospice caregivers were most likely to recommend hospices with caring staff, providing quality care, responsive to requests, and offering family support. Lack of staff, inadequate pain-symptom management were the two biggest barriers to hospice quality. All eight CAHPS measures were found in the discovered review topics. Close-ended CAHPS scores and open-ended online reviews have complementary insights. Future research should explore associations between CAHPS and review insights.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Medicine
American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Medicine HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
5.30%
发文量
169
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Medicine (AJHPM) is a peer-reviewed journal, published eight times a year. In 30 years of publication, AJHPM has highlighted the interdisciplinary team approach to hospice and palliative medicine as related to the care of the patient and family. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信